Cape Cod

I hardly ever comment on the POW, but this is an excellent photo. And for those who can't see the emotional appeal but only the technical flaws, that is your problem. The last couple of POW's have been excellent choices, some of the better one's we've seen in the last year or so. Sometimes art is captured with absolute precision and a masterful stroke of genius. And sometimes art shows up in the most unusual places and can be haphazard and disjointed and far from perfect. Thanks Brian for a slice of life. It put a smile on my face.

Marc G.- I wondered the same thing- was it staged or just a fleeting moment captured on film. I decided that I did not care one way or the other. It struck an emotional chord in me and that is why it is so appealing to me. It smacks of simplicity and the short, wonderful time of being young. That is like a breath of fresh air around here.

I generally try to say what I do and don't like about a photo. However this one is uninteresting, unoriginal, unaesthetic, and technically weak. If I knew the family, it might have a slight bit of emotional appeal, but it could easily be better in that aspect.

Technically weak? Please be more specific. Uninteresting, unoriginal, unaesthetic; OK. But when you're practically on your stomach trying to get the geometry right and maintain separation of elements, the sweat and sand everywhere and the shadows blocking up while trying to get a capture that reflects the nature of the light and the moment and some hyperkinetic kids, well, you might bridle at 'technically weak'. You try doing this with a plastic Polaroid... you might find it can separate the wheat from the chaff, Fred.

I agree with Louis McCullough that if this was taken with (non-Polaroid) film or digital, it might well not be here - not to say it would not be on the TRPs somewhere, but probably not here on the POW as a particularly interesting photograph. To me, that doesn't mean it is a weak shot, but instead that the choice of Polaroid, and of this particular image for Polaroid, was an excellent one. Who would have thought? Perhaps a man with a portfolio full of Polaroids.

 

I have questions about some of his other choices for Polaroid subjects -- the bins of vegetables in his portfolio, for example, don't speak to me in the same way and a choice of an incredibly high resolution large format might have spoken more (in my case). But, for this subject matter - unexpected and perfect. A tool used with talent.

 

As to the composition, I like it, and do think it is notable - anyone criticizing it care to share details of what is wrong with it?

Brian, You don't have to explain anything - this is such a great image. May be not everyone's cup of tea - this is from a different genre. I am happy that this was chosen as POW as it gives us a different flavor and idea about how diverse the photography can be. I never used Polaroid and never thought that it could have been an interesting format - now I see your photo and portfolio to find that one with real talent and eye can create art with any kind of camera/medium - not surprising, but comforting. To me, this photo works due to subjects, their interaction with each other, the theme harmonized with the light and composition. Congrats

Just because a photograph may have been made with an inexpensive camera, we shouldn't let what we may see as faults outweigh the impact of the image, itself. If that were the case, we'd end up ridiculing images made with Holgas, Dianas, and other cameras of that ilk.

Is this POW a "great" photograph? Ummm...no. But it does have something to say, and apparently speaks to a lot of people, myself included. So in that respect, it does succeed as a photograph, as it does elicit a visual and emotional response in a lot of viewers. I'm trying not to get too long-winded here, but I think we need to look at this photograph in its emotional context, as well as in the visual context. It was made in 1988. The children in the photo are now grown. Hopefully, they are all still alive and well. They will never again look as they look in this photograph. It's simply a moment in time that will never happen again, and from a time that will never return. That's how I see the shot, and why it works for me. I just don't let a technical aesthetic negate what the photograph says, regardless of whatever technical faults it may have.

And just in passing, if I'm not mistaken, there have been some digital images which were previously selected as a POW.

One final comment, then I'll shut up. As far as Polaroids go, even the great Walker Evans, in the last two years of his life, began shooting with a Polaroid SX-70 and pack film. His work with that camera and film raised questions about his aesthetics and possible motivation, but no one denies that they were an interesting departure for him. If you're interested in finding out more about this phase of his work, you can click on this link.

Ah! Color fidelity as a technical weakness. I had mentioned it more because I think it works, and expresses very well the "beachy" feel of light reflected and scattered by heat and sand. It is a sad world where the only departures from meticulous and faithful color rendition embraced are those of oversaturated ex-Velvia addicts habitually pushing up some levers in Photoshop.

Very good nostalgic & sentimental values. The color shift immediately takes you back in time

Earlier in a fit of pique I referred to 'try doing this with a plastic Polaroid', and I was wrong. I do not like Polaroids being compared with cameras that include light leaks in their charm, and the (relative) quality of the camera should be no excuse for favoring a photo.

What Polaroid Spectra is to me is a medium. If I could shoot it on the Olympus e-300 I've fallen in love with I would. One of those adaptors and some Zuikos and I'm in heaven. As a MEDIUM it must be appreciated on it's merits, just as a charcoal drawing or an oil applied with spatulas require the same. Yes, the resolution is low, and the film is unstable; but the right light at the right moment and Polaroid produces an image that looks like no other photo medium. A single unique capture. In my humble opinion the posters above who speak of an emotional connection are responding to the use of that light and the feeling of intimacy in the perspective. I do not shoot for nostalgia or memory or cuteness.

Polaroid is not an excuse to accept inferior images; it's a different process.

See you tonight, thanks.

Brian, maybe you (or someone) please, could give a short info on the Polaroid processing and history of the genre -- it is a perfect place to do it as this thread will be be archived forever & ever :0)

From many uninformed comments here I gather people don't know that polaroid is not a negative or a digital file capture. So many won't understand what you just pointed out: the quality of polaroid photography cannot and should not be compared to that of digital.

I can't wait to have a pinhole shot for the next POW -- that's really a low quality photography. What really bugs me is the damage done to the way people think of and perceive photography -- the surgical analysis of the technical specs are not the way to look at a photograph. And POW is so guilty of promoting empty perfections that is about time to make up for it.

I am not old or wise enough to now much about polaroids. That's a pity, because I love it from what I've seen. This image is basic photography done right, and I'll choose it any day over composites, HDR, layers, masks and a ton of PS stuff that I now very little about. Not that I have anything against PS - just don't really know how and don't use it.

 

Heck, in twenty years time I'll probably write (or type, or just think it and you will be able to mind read it): "I'll choose digital images with PS any day over >>> whatever we will be using then<<<."

 

Anyway, congratulations with the POW. I can't hide my exitement that a straight polaraid shot was chosen as POW. And I like it, for whatever reason.

 

JH

It often seems like poeple don't read this:

 

This image has been selected for discussion. It is not necessarily the "best" picture the Elves have seen this week, nor is it a contest. It is simply an image that the Elves found interesting and worthy of discussion.

 

People are talking!

 

I like this picture for the reasons mentionned. It really isn't a technical tour de force, but it doesn't need to be. It is a composed image, with a chosen format that achieves an intended purpose: to stimulate feelings. Brian has answered that he doesn't just do this by accident, it's not a vacation snap shot (not even his family!) and in doing so has brought to the table he's out there to make art.Photography isn't that old of a medium and art and we still have a long way to go to exploring all its facets and getting more offbeat incarnations accepted as art. Props to Brian for looking backwards to go forward. He'll probably get tripped up a few times, but he's going somewhere!

Some of the most stunning color photos I have ever seen were by Marie Cosindas using the Polaroid system. I don't know if I have ver seen color quite like that.

"Polaroid Spectra is to me is a medium...As a MEDIUM it must be appreciated on it's merits..."

This should be the line that gets read again and again by the dismissive masses.

This image far eclipses anything that's been posted on the TRP pages for as long as I can remember. The composition, color, and format all serve the aesthetics of the image. I find it laughable that in a sea of images with absolutely no thought given to color harmony that anyone could criticize the pallet of Spectra.

And while the difficulty of shooting this should in no way influence a viewers appreciation, it at least warrants acknowledgement in a photographic forum so keenly tuned to the latest pixel count.

I suggest that aspiring photographers review Brian's entire portfolio and compare it to anyone offhandedly dismissing this and then draw their own conclusions.

I would have to agree that if this was taken with anything other than polaroid it would be getting panned. If they were my kids I'd love this photo but there not so I see it as a strangers snapshot being shoved under my uninterested nose. I know this sounds harsh. I looked at this photo for a while yesterday trying to workout what it was that I didn't like and today when I looked in again it dawned on me, I find it average to look at based on the colours being (imho) so washed out. But this is just my opinion and I'm sure people are sick to death of looking at my very amaturish shots. I geuss I was trying to answer the above question of " I wonder what younger people would think of this "

I like this photo.

 

I like it because it captures a moment in time which can be determined by the fashion, hair cut styles of the day, as well as the faded but colourful Polaroid chemical "colour space" of the past.

 

I like it because of the candid honesty of the picture since it is not artificially composed or "made perfect" using Photoshop.

 

In this day of perfect digital fonts, I like the fact that the captions are handwritten making the photo object itself a kind of historical object.

 

I like the irony in that the handmade one-off object has been scanned and posted on the internet.

 

This photo simultaneously captures a moment from the past, using a photochemical process, converted to a digital image for today's viewer. The original image which was viewable only by the viewer holding it in his/her hands now through it's digitisation allows it to be viewed by anyone with a computuer anywhere in the world.

I like the "Andy Warholism" of the statement that it makes about the turbulent state of photography today.

I look at what I wrote about this photograph so long ago (or at least it seems long ago to me) and every word still rings true. This is a masterfull photograph taken by someone with a lot of skill and talent. If you don't think so, show me something you can do half as well. Yes that's right folks, I will spot you 50% and I am still willing to bet you will still come up short.

 

Take a look at the photographs in any current fashion magazine and you will see a lot of photos that do not follow your sacred rules of how to take a good photograph. That is because excellent photographs like this one reflect the personality and skills of the photographer, not an outdated how-to book.

 

If you don't get it, then you don't get it and I am a little bit sorry for you. Photography is an art and art is about emotion and making an emotional connection. If the only emotion you can manage to express or produce is some bland opionion about following predetermined rules, then you may as well give up photography (or any other form of self expression)because the world does not care about what you have to say.

 

Photography is about communication and emotion. People make decisions based on information and emotions. The people who make decisions about what to purchase and the value they place on those items do so in a large part based on emotion. Photographs need emotional context in order to make a connection with the viewer. There are too many photographs out there (of essentially the same subjects) so that if your photographs do not have any emotional context, then you are just pissing in the wind. Your only reason to exist as a photographer is to buy expensive photography equipment in order to bring the cost down so that people who actually know what to do with it can afford to buy it.

 

You had better be an authority on color theory if you are going to critique this photograph because of week color. This is an image that depicts a unique time and place. Maybe the critics are too young to understand that there was a world before they came along. Feel free not to like the photograph for any number of reasons, just pick one that makes some sort of sense or better yet ask yourself why this image is such a mystery to you.

 

Let the screetching begin. ;-)

I completley agree with you Dennis that photography is about self expression and emotion, but for you to speak on behalf of "the world" and dismiss others opinions because they don't like they way something looks , and therefore goes against your own opinion, is not in the spirit of open discussion. If a photographer can bring out an emotion in others with their work then yes they have acheived their goal but in this instance I PERSONALLY ( and I stress that this is only my point of veiw ) feel no emotional pull to this image.

 

Maybe your right and I'm helping to reduce the cost of cameras but I don't see that as bad thing for people who seem to think that photography is about evoking emotions in others to sell their products.

 

Please visit my page and give any advice on how I can become a better photographer, I would truely value your insight, after all I'm just trying to learn buy throwing myself into the game.

 

Cheers C.R.

I think that this pic works because of the light, the colours, the three children standing on a beach devoid of any referential index, out of time and space if not for the handwritten caption.

 

Those kids could be his (but he stated they are not) or mine or whoevers', it is just a memory that could belong to any of us therefore we(I) feel a strong pull towards it.

 

I have to admit that I didn't like at all the POWs of the last weeks. Although they were graphically very compelling and "clean", they were lacking a "point", a reason for which I should laugh or cry or feel something.

 

I think that this pic is full of emotion.

 

To the one saying "teach me to become a better photographer" (looked like ironic, I know). I had a look at your portfolio. Lots of stuff, some nice some less, but overall I have the impression you have nothing else to say rather than "look what pics I can take". Start providing content to your pics, dig in your emotions and you will fly.

 

I think the author of this weeks' POW has been long diggin in his emotions and knows that:

 

1. graphically excellent does not necessarily mean interesting.

 

2. you do some pics because they are important for you and yourself only, what other people think is only secondary.

 

b.

A great photograph. Intimate, refreshing, mood-enhancing stuff.

I must confess; I DO take family pictures. Please meet my daughter:

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3180940

this must be one of the best POW's that I have seen in a long time. It is very refreshing and, at least to me, perfectly composed. Moreover, if you think that it was probably not set up, you have to conclude that it is this kind of images that show us the beauty on the everyday life.

 

I am tyred of looking at the tones of super-stylized images that bombard us most of the time. They may have a big impact on us the first time that we see them but are forgotten after a short time. I know that because I can look back at some images that I rated high during my first months in PN and, now that the initial impact is gone, they dont tell me anything. Only images like this one, full with good feelings and real life, are the ones that I enjoy everytime I look at them. It does not even matter that I have never met, and will probably never meet, the people on them.

 

I thank the elves for choosing it because it also gave me the oportunity of looking at the work of Brian Carter. I simply love his polaroid work.

Do you know who Bessie Smith is? How about a Hayden string quartet? Throw in a little "Weather Report", since it wasn't top forty material 25 years ago.

 

If you heard any of these selections and countless others in the context of 2006 pop radio, would you be able to transport yourself to another era so that you could appreciate what they were all about? That's the problem with photo.net and most other photo sharing sites. Classic photography - meaning anything that isn't presented in the dominant PS processed style - is lost because viewers do not have the experience necessary to make the switch in context.

 

I've never shot polaroids, but the colors and format are instantly recognizable and carry with them a set of cultural references. I believe that's how this image was meant to be viewed and appreciated.

Well there seems to be a nice split here between either thinking this photograph is

masterly and thinking this is an unremarkable snapshot. Before I say anything further I just

want to declare myself firmly in the "masterly" camp, and also state for the record that all

my rates on Brian's photos were given about a year ago. Shortly after seeing Brian's work,

and largely inspired by it, I went out and got myself a Polaroid Spectra myself. (I rated four

photos. Out of seven 7/7 ratings that I have given, Brian has four of them - one being for

the photo of Hannah, which I find particularly striking, even if she does seem to be holding

a very large paperclip)

 

So, my colours shown, I will try to tell you why I rate the photograph so highly and at the

same time defend it against those who would say it is an unremarkable family snapshot

with washed-out, oversaturated colours, that is technically deficient and generally below

average.

 

I have been thinking about why people consider this to be a simple snapshot. I suppose

one thing seems to be that if people don't like a picture that is one of the first snap

criticisms that will be offered. But with this photo I think that the subject and the fact that

it is a Polaroid may falsely lead some people to see no further than that. "Children on a

beach" means holiday snap. "Polaroid" means throwaway type camera from office party.

 

In this picture there is a lot more going on. My eye seems almost trapped in the picture. It

is natural to follow the gazes of people in photographs - the central figure (boy in check

shorts) seems to be looking at the boy in red shorts. I move to the boy in red shorts who

has his back to us. He is probably looking at the other boy, and in looking back at what is

in his field of vision we are sent back to him again by the marvellous expression on the

little girls face. Which sends us back to the check shorts which either sends us back again

into the circle, or we follow his arm up to the dog. The dog is looking out of frame. We

can't see the red short boys expression, but he seems to be smiling. Maybe the check boy

or the girl are looking at the camera - it's hard to pin it down. The point being that there

is life in this picture and life in the interaction of the group.

 

As to the colours - these are the colours that came out. There is not much you can do with

Polaroid film - especially the Spectra - other than take the picture and then wait for it to

come out. This is how that film reacted to the light that day. If some people don't like it

then there is not much to be done about it, but I personally find that the warm cast lends

an amazing feeling of what it is like to be on a beach on a sunny day. I think the colours

are very faithful [i used to have some def jam shorts like those so I know] apart from

maybe a slight pink tinge to the sand/sky, which I like.

 

More interesting is the actual interplay of colours. The red shorts are picked out in the

girl's red cup. Her pink suit picked out in the boys shorts. The yellow and blue of the boys

shorts picked out in the truck and the sky. Even the black checks are echoed elsewhere. As

a colour photograph, I find this to be an extremely interesting picture.

 

Technically it's hard to fault. There are very few controls on the camera anyway but Brian

has managed to get all the detail where it is needed and the only bits that could be said to

be under or over exposed are perfect like that - ie the sand and the shadow under the

truck/wheel. Both the sunlit and shadowed areas on the figures are beautiful. Even the dog

is good - he could so easily have been a silhouette.

 

I think this picture stands alone, but when viewed in the light of the entire portfolio it

becomes something else. As some quote goes, to do something once is an accident, a few

times an experimentation, a hundred time it becomes a style. Brian has been using

Polaroid for almost 20 years it seems. I see a photographer who has a unique style and

who knows what he wants to do with his camera of choice and who is succeeding with

great results.

 

I am sorry to have been so long-winded, but for once you have chosen a picture for POW

that I truly believe is excellent, and for once I had something to say about it. Thank you for

giving this picture and photographer some exposure.

 

Robert X